From Coincidence of the Day:

President Barack Obama met with the President of the National Treasury Employees Union Colleen Kelley, on March 31, 2010. The NTEU is “the 150,000 member union that represents IRS employees along with 30 other separate government agencies.” The Inspector General’s report, blandly titled “Inappropriate Criteria Were Used to Identify Tax-Exempt Applications for Review,” indicates that the IRS “set to work in earnest targeting the Tea Party and conservative groups around America” the very next day.”

Alright, first of all you’ve got the Internal Revenue Service violating the very Constitution it’s people are hired to work for.  We’re not terribly sure why just yet.  An idiot can figure it out, but we don’t know the nuts and bolts.  The insinuation here is Kelley is the nut, and Obama is the bolt.  I think that’s probably going to pan out being true.  I don’t think she’s the only nut tho.  Two IRS directors, both set to retire within days, were “fired” over this so far.  I don’t really think one single person has bit that bait.  I’m gonna bet the spotlight is going to wind up on Miss Kelley because the timing is damning.  I personally think it would be kind of hard to get the ball rolling “the very next day”.  But, she’s in a hell of a spot.

Which brings me to the spot.  Why do we have unions representing federal employees in the first place?  They are notoriously corrupt and notoriously political.  Neither are qualities we want in our government.  With minimum wage standards, unemployment, right to work, and all the billion other laws covering federal employment, what purpose does a union even accomplish?  Rather that focusing on this one abuse, which IS rather serious, how’s about we look at the root of the problem and eliminate it?  Get rid of federal employee unions and people like Colleen Kelley won’t be there to be abusing the faith the public gives federal employees.

This is just nuts:

White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said Sunday Republicans owe Susan  Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, an apology for alleging she  played a part in formulating the White House’s response to the attacks in  Benghazi, Libya, last year that killed four Americans.

Pfeiffer said on ABC’s “This Week” that the release of more than 100 pages of  Benghazi emails and notes show “beyond a shadow of the doubt” that accusations  she tried to change the narrative of what happened in the attacks was  false.

“And, frankly, I think that many of the Republicans who have been talking  about this, now that they have seen the emails, owe Ambassador Rice an apology  for the things they said about her in the wake of the attack,” he said.

“An apology for what?” host George Stephanopoulos asked.

“For accusing her of misleading the country,” Pfeiffer said, adding, “For  saying that she didn’t — that somehow we were — she was involved in some sort  of political whitewash of what happened there. What she said was what the  intelligence community believed at the time. And when we got further  information, we told the American people what that was. That’s how people know  what happened here.”

Read more:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/19/obama-senior-adviser-says-republicans-owe-rice-apology-on-benghazi/#ixzz2TlG9TL6C

Now, as pretty much everyone now knows, including Dan Pfeiffer, Susan Rice told blatant lies immediately following the Benghazi attack.  Granted she may not have been the person who created the lies, but, since the world knew they were lies almost immediately after it happened, if it were not for the persistance of the Republicans, the whole world would STILL think it was Susan Rice who fabricated the lies.  NOW, we know she didn’t.  So, Susan Rice should be thankful to the Republicans for clearing her name, and the Obama administration is OBVIOUSLY the ones who owe her the apology for feeding her a bunch of lies to give to the world.  What the Republicans are doing now is trying to figure out exactly who it is that does owe Susan Rice the apology.

I’m gonna bet Dan Pfeiffer is probably in that group.

In wake of the Boston bombing, I expected a whole lot of knee-jerk reactions.  First major meltdown apparently is New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

This is stupid on several levels.  The first and most obvious is this is exactly what terrorists like these guys had in mind in the first place.  They don’t want us to have a Constitution, they want sharia law.  So, Bloomberg has surrendered.  The Tsarnaevs beat him.

Secondly, the assumption of absolute privacy was abandoned a long, long, time ago.  Wiretaps have been legal in some form since about 1967.  They have been expanded wildly under The Patriot Act.  When President Obama was running for office, he said he was going to get rid of the horribly invasive Patriot Act.  He didn’t.  He made it even more intruding.  His people didn’t care.  The laws changed before, but more importantly, the interpretations of the Constitution changed then.  The assumption of privacy has for the most part been abandoned since 2009.  People simply quibble over what little privacy they think they have left and only worry about it when a President of the opposite party is in office.

Thirdly:

The evidence that got all this going wasn’t because the bombers had sacrificed some amount of personal privacy, it was evidence obtained in public.  There is no assumption of privacy when you’re walking down a sidewalk, attending a crowded event, or entering someone’s business.  None.  There are plenty of existing laws that allow suspicious behavior to be monitored.  There are plenty of existing laws and technology that allow evidence to be obtained to prevent them from doing it again.  Our interpretation of the US Constitution doesn’t need to be watered down another iota.  Mayor Bloomberg is just clueless what all can be done under the existing scenario and does what every bureaucrat does under this circumstance, thinks it takes a law to fix the problem.  We had all kinds of laws in place to prevent this from happening in the first place.  They all failed.  As the Nuge pointed out, what makes him think the 42nd law would have done what the other 41 didn’t?

I kid you not:

WHDH-TV –

When his teacher saw his strawberry tart…
“She was pretty mad, and I think I was in big trouble,” said Josh Welch.
Then josh’s dad was called.
“And she said that they had to suspend josh for two days because he used his breakfast pastry and fashioned it as a gun,” said B.J. Welch, Josh’s father.
Josh’s dad says he was told his son also said the words ‘bang, bang’ while holding that breakfast pastry and that constituted a threat.
“I didn’t say ‘bang, bang,’ I just pointed up at the ceiling,” said Josh Welch.
“I asked if was anyone hurt. They said no. I would almost call it insanity. I mean with all the potential issues that could be dealt with at school — real threats, bullies, whatever the issue is. It’s a pastry,” said B.J. Welch.

Read more: http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/national/northeast/10010006692136/boy-suspended-for-making-pastry-look-like-gun/#ixzz2MgHhi44R

Vice President Biden said Monday that President Obama is not “bluffing” about his willingness to use military force to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/04/biden-on-iran-threat-obama-is-not-bluffing/?test=latestnews#ixzz2MbHnK1bb

Whew!  LOL!  Then I told Joe, “Pull the other one!”.

The people in the United States have already given up on Obama trying to outwit Iran.  There’s no point in Biden blustering like that.  Seriously, it serves no purpose at this time.  Israel will bomb the crap out of Iran, a whole bunch of countries will talk big, and Obama will do nothing.

Not too long ago we had this flap:

State workers made repeated shopping trips to Albany-area Walmarts to purchase supplies for the Executive Mansion, spending about $300 in recent months, according to billing records reviewed by the Daily News Wednesday.

“A conscious effort is being made to spend as little money as possible,” said Franklin Hecht, chief financial officer for the state’s Office of General Services, which runs the mansion.

The Walmart excursions annoyed union leaders, who have slammed the retail giant for its refusal to accept organized labor.

“We think it would be a better use of taxpayers’ money to shop at stores that are not causing so much harm to working people,” said Stuart Appelbaum, president of the 100,000-member Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/union-leaders-hit-gov-cuomo-hard-walmart-shopping-trips-article-1.968205#ixzz2Mb1zJVNC

So, I found it curious that we now wake up to this story:

President Barack Obama will nominate a veteran of the Clinton administration and Walmart’s current philanthropic director to lead his Office of Management and Budget on Monday

Sure,, they’re trying to paint it that she’s qualified because she’s a former Clinton aide and only runs the philanthropic arm of Walmart.  But still, the bottom line, is Walmart is in the White House.  And we all know how much liberals and especially the unions love Walmart.

I personally would be more concerned but since Obama places so little concern on actually submitting budgets, this position will be largely symbolic.

Can this man not sink any lower?
If you don’t get it, don’t ask!

I kid you not:

For what it’s worth, as far as Maxine’s impact on me, I don’t blame Maxine for being stupid, I blame the voters of California’s 43rd District for voting for her. These people right here:

She’s been saying stupid stuff for years and the people of Los Angeles just keep voting for her. Is there truly no one else in Los Angeles that can represent you guys better than this? Do you really think that because she is so clueless about an issue she makes the right decisions? I mean, losing 170,000,000 jobs is really bad! We better do something about that awful sequester huh? Every single person in the United States, plus a few million more, will lose their jobs today. That’s really bad isn’t it?

Oh well, thanks Los Angeles, for taking the time to think so hard about who you’re sending to Washington. With so much consideration put into the process of selecting our leaders, it’s hard to imagine why we’re in the mess we’re in right now.

I hear CNN and MSNBC are still working on a scathing expose on Maxine’s fuzzy math. News at 11, I’m sure.

More of the hopey-changy stuff:

According to Nancy Pelosi:

“Independent reports confirm that speculators are driving up the cost of oil, hurting consumers and potentially damaging the economic recovery. Wall Street profiteering, not oil shortages, is the cause of the price spike.  In fact, U.S. oil production is at its highest level since 2003, and millions of acres have been cleared for additional development.

“We need to take strong action to protect consumers from this speculation.  Unfortunately, Republicans have chosen to protect the interests of Wall Street speculators and oil companies instead of the interests of working Americans by obstructing the agencies with the responsibility of enforcing consumer protection laws.  They have also repeatedly opposed our efforts to end billions of dollars in outdated taxpayer subsidies for oil companies enjoying record profits.

“We support efforts by the Obama Administration to expand domestic energy resources, including natural gas and renewable sources like wind and solar that create jobs in America and will end our dangerous dependence on foreign energy supplies.  This can be achieved because today, the United States currently has more oil and gas rigs at work than the rest of the world combined, and imports of foreign oil have decreased.

“We call on the Republican leadership to act on behalf of American consumers and join our efforts to crack down on speculators who care more about their profits than the price at the pump even if these spikes harm the American consumer and our economy.”

First of all, this isn’t anything new:

See that spike in late 2010?  Nancy had nothing to say then.  Probably because Obama was telling us something completely different then:

Higher gas prices were necessary…….

But, then, again, once HIS people started complaining about what HE promised would happen, he has this to say:

And Nancy Pelosi immediately changes her story.  Now, it’s unnamed “independent reports” blaming it all on “speculators”.  The price of gas is high.  But, either she’s lived patiently with those “speculators” since last year saying nothing, or something has suddenly changed her mind.  But, the price of gas isn’t suddenly higher than it was four years ago, it’s been higher the ENTIRE four years Obama’s been charge.  Those “speculators” apparently didn’t appear until Obama showed up.  The bottom line is it’s not “speculators” who have been doing this for fifty years.  They speculate on the price going DOWN as much as they do it going up.  They make their money on it moving either way.  So, that doesn’t make any sense either.  I know that’s too complicated for CNN to handle.  But, I’m guessing my average reader here gets it.

I call Nancy’s bluff and flat out accuse her of lying.

Who are those “independent reports”?

Who are those “speculators”?

Why did Obama say the price would go up when he was running?  And when it did, say it was someone else’s fault?

There’s a lot of BS coming from the Democrats right now.